Slashdot Mirror
A Glimpse At Apple's New Core
Coolvibe writes: "Apple has updated their Mac OS X page. There's screenshots of the final version there. I myself am still running the Public Beta and the stuff that's shown there is just a *tad* different than what I am using right now :) For instance, the dock now has a context menu, as shown here." And speaking of Apple's core, Justin0407 directs your attention to this NYTime article on Steve Jobs, in which "Jobs gives us his insight on how he's going to save Apple and try and keep it afloat. Building on other's ideas of a PC or Mac being the 'hub' for all digital appliances, Jobs says Apple will embrace this concept."
"..when you select something with a single click, the far right pane displays a larger icon of that program/picture/folder &tc's icon there. This icon is double clickable as well. If for example instead of IE it was QIII that was selected, the icon would merely be the QIII icon."
This is the "preview" feature of the new finder. Selecting an application icon will just give you a larger view of the icon (up to 128 x 128, I believe), but selecting a document can give you a preview of the document's contents. This means selecting a JPEG will show you a thumbnail of the image, while if you select a Quicktime movie it will actually play the movie for you in the preview pane.
Along with a lot of others. stocks go up, stocks go down.
Processor speed is stuck at 500 MHz
please take the time to update your flame
There are legions of corporations and individuals who have been disrespected by Apple--from the BeOS community to the Apple clone industry, all of whom comprise a formidable enemies list.
ooooh "disrespected" I'm sure apple is shivering in fear! So do you need to know a secret handshake to get in to the "Apple enemy list clubhouse"? (now for a flame of my own : the Be community is only a formidable enemy if they start car bombing. A formidable enemy is Microsoft who despite wanting to be in bed with apple also wants to kill apple)
Motorola, is hurting and hopes to leave the desktop processor business. This week Motorola announced 2500 layoffs
okay explain how Motorola closing a factory in Harvard Illinois that makes cellphones means that Mot is leaving the desktop cpu biz? Let me repeat myself : a factory that makes cellphones. Designs cell phones? no. Designs processors? no. Design the cell phone's case? no. Design anything? no. And it isnt like Mot doesn't have other cell phone factories
The most reasonable solution would be for Apple to open up. Open up its hardware specs and software
If apple opens both the hardware and the software then what exactly would apple be selling? stickers with the Apple logo? This would make money for apple how? flame on baby
btw you do realize that you've posted this several times before?
There is an excellent NATIVE web browser for Mac OS X, called OmniWeb. You can download it from www.omnigroup.com.
I was under the impression that ANY carbon application was native to both Classic OS as well as OS X. This is what apple have to say here:
"What is Carbon?
Like Classic apps, Carbon applications run on Mac OS 9 -- but they also run on Mac OS X. They'll get all the great features of Darwin, like protected memory for crash-resistant computing and preemptive multitasking for a more responsive system, as well as the new Aqua look and feel. "
And the IE in the PB was a carbonised app so it got the protected memory, multitasking &tc. As for the part about where apple got the ideas from i am not aware of. It would be a pity if apple did just grab the idea for sherlock from the ppl who make OmniWeb.
How every version of MICROS~1 Windows(TM) comes to exist.
Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
--I'm not actually after an answer!
What my unix box needs now is a nicer rendering engine. We'll see where XFree86 takes us!
-bugg
its prudent to have separate partitions, and had an unexpected bonus for me. my classic partition got corrupted so i was able to save it using X and not lose any data. kewl.
seems like a waste of money when a company can get a piece of crap PC to run Linux and Apache....?
unless they want to dish out a lot of $$$ for the extra mac hardware...
All right on wincent.org they show the vertical dock, from the build at macworld. Apparently, it's now a defaults option. That is, orientation right, and pinned.
Pretty darn cool. Remind's me of the old next bar. I'll probably choose this option over the centered dock, and Desktop icons.
This appears to be a phenomenal product. I am seriously considering ditching my windows and linux boxes both and moving to a Mac once this hits the shelves.
Its just seems that OSX is where Gnome and KDE want to get to, but will probably never arrive. While I believe in these open-source efforts, I can't be bothered to wait around for them anymore.
IE also has an ugly interface and doesn't have the fabulous features of a certain browser from germany...
also, has anyone yet said that they'd love to use apple hardware but they think its so much more expensive?
This is a market in which Microsoft and it's primary competitor Symbian are going after, and to many it would appear to be the future of computing.
The funny thing is, it took a long time for the Newton division to turn a profit. And shortly after it did, Steve killed it.
One of Steve's character flaws seems to be that he is willing to let personal feelings interfere with business decisions. Newton was a pet project of John Sculley, his old adversary, so the general consensus is that he wanted to eradicate any legacy Sculley left behind.
Steve also killed the Claris software division, which I believe was also started by Sculley. Claris had been very profitable during its run. If one of the main criticisms of your platform is that you don't have enough software apps, does it make sense to kill off a profitable software division? Of course not. Now we see, though, that Steve is interested in building more killer apps in-house. What a novel idea (glad he thought of it!).
Apple needs Claris again, if for no other reason than to have a major software publisher that is keenly interested in Mac-only and Mac-first software titles. Could it be any more plain how Microsoft has built a fortune from acquisitions and publishing? Apple has much to learn. I've said this before, just imagine if Apple had acquired Bungie instead of Microsoft and released Halo on the Mac a couple of months ahead of other platforms...it would have had a big impact.
And speaking of games, no tier-one game publisher is interested in releasing Mac-first titles. Until the Mac starts getting tier-one Mac-first and Mac-only games on a regular basis, gamers will always scoff at the Mac. Claris was in a perfect position to make that happen for Apple.
Steve has done a tremendous job since his return, but of all the cutbacks he made, those are the two that gripe me the most. Steve needs to learn how to swallow that massive ego of his when it's in the best interest of the platform.
I am still waiting for the VNC server to be ported to it. I *do* have VNC clients for MacOSX though
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
Those screenshots aren't necessarily from "the final version"--OS X hasn't even gone gold master yet. They're just from the version Steve Jobs showed off at MacWorld.
oh do be serious
Hello?! Wireless information devices, huh? I use a G3400 PB on an airport network every day. It may not have much of a range, but it kicks ass over anything M$ and Symbian have to offer today. Now, if only I could get Guiliani to implement a contiguous wireless LAN throughout Manhattan.
They REALLY need to get rid of them, and no making them all the same color does NOT help. Sure, they cool and new and cute now, but after you use them for a few months on end, they will get stale. Moreover, they look childish.
Use lsof. Shouldn't be forever until it's ported.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
You forgot the required slam about the one-button mouse in the article listing.
That does not take away the fact that Carbon apps can still moan and flake if they were programmed for Mac OS 9. This is actually the main reason not to use UFS yet.
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
Yep, and it also uses the Netinfo domains for the settings, which reflect back in ~/Library/Preferences/*.plist which are all XML files. This just breathes coolness :)
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
How did that old ad from Macintosh go? $>CNGRTLNS.MCX!
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
Well my god look out ... BeOS invents popups.
Please take a look at a few shareware Mac programs:
a) Now Menus
b) PopupFolders
both of which enabled popups to hierarchially browse the hard disk.
Naden.
it-guys.com/naden/
Funtage Factor: Purple
Thanks for all of the responses.
Her iMac has the original 32mb. The impression I'm getting from the Ars Technica article and the responses is that it might be a bit of a stretch to get OS X up and running smoothly on this maching.
Priority, get her machine more memory before putting down the cash for the OS? Sound right?
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
Yo moderator what crack are you smoking? What was wrong with my post???
How every version of MICROS~1 Windows(TM) comes to exist.
Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
--I'm not actually after an answer!
That's not too good. System files I can understand requiring a fairly rigid directory structure. As for applications, documents, etc. their location shouldn't matter. Computers are tools for users, not the other way around. If Joe Blow prefers keeping all his documents in the same directory as a program, why shouldn't he? Not everyone is as anal about file organization as many /. denziens, and they don't have to be.
Lord knows, I'd be pissed if someone told me that I wasn't allowed to keep my computer in my bedroom, and that it HAD to be in the den or something. Let people do what they want up to the point where it actually breaks the machine. And then try to improve that machine, cause it shouldn't break on such a stupid thing.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I do happen to know what I'm talking about here, I just can't talk about it. Just wait and see.
IIRC, this conract expired on 1st Jan 2001. I think it was being considered that the mozilla timetable would allow N6 final to be released in time for it to be the new heart of AOL.
type G FIND . That should switch you to the finder. That trick can also break you out of an app freeze if the 3 finger salute fails.
Apple is caving in and dumbing down OS X because old school Mac users can't handle change. They are blowing it. Steve Jobs in the past would never back down, he would tell people to learn a new way to think/work. I was excited about OS X, but now my interest is starting to dimish.
I assume that since Apple is using the Mach 3 kernel that they are running with a user mode server ?? Does anyone know ?? We used Mach 3 and the OSF/1 single server on the Paragon supercomputer and could never get around the performance hit that was caused by the user mode server and all the protection domains you had to cross to do anything. (networking in particular.)
Oh come on! Every time anyone mentions OSX and microsoft, someone will pipe up with the old "a port for linux will be soon!!!". The fact is, the carbon API that 90-odd% of OSX apps use is just a tidied-up classic macos API. Even the nextstep-based cocoa relies heavily on quartz and other proprietary features. It'll be hardly easier to port from osx that it was from os9. However, the third api set for osx is Java, and that's another kettle of fish entirely.
MySQL works on OSX right now. Someone at Apple has submitted patches to PostgreSQL to get it to build & run on the golden master.
jpb
username: dotslash
passwd: slashdot
There goes my karma :)
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
ISTR, based on reading (a year or so ago) the findings of fact in the MS case, that AOL is locked into a contract that obliges them to maintain IE as their browser for a span several years. That term might be up in a year or two, but in any event I think they're bound to it at the moment. In that light whether or not IE is better or worse than Mozilla isn't really relevant...
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
If the Bells & Whistles are W3C standards, and work in Mac IE and Windows IE, but Netscape doesn't support the standard, is it rude of the web site to utilize them? We had this question with my corporate site.
Alex
I agree. Really, who, except Linux users really care? This may seem like a flamebait but seriously, I'd say 99% of Windows users don't even KNOW what open source is, much less would they care if the source was open or not. I'm a software engineer and I sure as hell have better things to do with my time than look at 50 megs of browser and OS source code after work.
It runs exclusively on Windows and Mac, and the Mac version (and the rare non-x86 Windows versions)
Windows, Mac, HP-UX and Solaris, if memory serves. And even if we forget the UNIX versions, which might have dubious quality, that still covers some 95+% of all computers in the world.. "exclusively" is a little misleading when only a marginal amount of hardcore, impossible to please open source fans are "left out" (that would choose NOT to run the browser anyway, even if it was available for their platform).
are not often compatable with IE specific content because IE specific content usually relies on x86 ActiveX
What?! That's complete rubbish. Hardly any sites use ActiveX. I use IE (except when I'm trying out Mozilla builds) and I have it set to warn me about ActiveX and I don't remember that I would EVER have come across a site that uses ActiveX! If you're going to diss a browser and you are using 3 points to do this, you could at least come up with something remotely based on reality. That was just a plain lie.
It extends the HTML standard encouraging authors to use this to the detriment of compatability with other content.
HTML? Not really, except MARQUEE (sp?) maybe, but then Netscape has BLINK and Lynx lacks support for 90% of HTML so that's not really the big problem you're making it out to be. What is a little more worrying is the document object model and CSS support, which just plain sucks on *EVERY* single browser including Mozilla and even the latest Opera version. Even in CSS, the support IE has is the best, IMHO, but you are right in that a little too much "innovation" has been made in this area. However, given the current state of CSS support and scripting standardization in general, I think it's a little unfair to single Microsoft out. At least they have the best CSS support out there right now. If you're so desperate to boycot a browser, go after Netscape Communicator 4.x and start hacking on Mozilla.
I agree that Konqueror is the next best browser, second to IE. That fact that Konqueror is free and free makes it better than IE in the end.
I know you don't need to run KDE to use Konqueror, but let Konqueror be evidence of KDE's success.
KDE Konqueror
Actually, it seems that there is a Solaris version, and possibly HP-UX as well. Go to http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/search.asp and view products for Solaris &/or HP-UX. I see version 5 editions of IE & Outlook Express for both operating systems.
So, the question from there is will a binary executable for one of those run on Linux, or is WINE emulation a more productive route to try?
As for the ActiveX stuff, yeah, that's bullshit. But just don't use it & you're mostly okay (as a user, disable it and as a developer, avoid it). IE really is a good browser, especially the 5.0 version on Mac, which renders pages beautifully and seems pretty standards-friendly to me (decent CSS & XML support, etc). Mozilla is a hog, and while I'd love to see it do well, I just can't afford to let it have all my ram & disc space, only to crash all the time & have an ugly interface besides. I'm terribly disappointed in it. IE, I reluctantly have to say, is just plain better, and it's probably more available than you realize.
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
Unlike the client, the new Mac OS X Server is not based on darwin. I've had a copy of a beta of it for about 2 months now.
Of course, it's not as pretty.
Blar.
the Mac OsX server product has been quietly updated to encompass just these kinds of intranet / extranet LAN/WAN serving.
it'll be the same as the desktop product, except with the apps for more server oriented things included in the box.
A host is a host from coast to coast, but no one uses a host that's close
Does your platform support the latest browser technology? (read: does your platform support IE?)
Does your platform support the most popular user-applications?
Granted, there are many applications that are available for AIX that are not available for OSX, but these are in extremely vertical markets (where AIX should prosper anyway - it is not meant as a consumer product).
There's a blurb on the release page about MS Office being released for OS X in the fall, I wonder how long it will take to make it to the rest of the *nix's.
I seem to remeber Apple using telnet for remote admin on MOSX but in the apache screenshot it says SSH. Have they switched??
"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Uninstalling IE just became easier :)
(Yes, I use OmniWeb on MacOSX PB for my Webbrowsing)
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
if you want the *best* performance of the Classic environment in MacOS X you should *not* partition them (OS 9 and OS X) apart, any number of well-placed Mac authorities have found this to be inarguably true. (King Crimson: "i repeat myself when i'm distressed... i repeat myself when i'm distressed... i repeat myself when i'm distressed... i repeat...")
That doesn't mean it should have to wipe your ass for you. The desktop was designed to be a place to begin access to the filesystem and maybe hold shortcuts to frequently used apps. It is incredibly sloppy to use it to store your personal files. Computers should work for you, but you have to use them as they were intended, just as you can't expect a manual transmission to shift for you just because it should "work for you."
-----------------------
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
As it stands, BeOS itself had a rather crude interface and zilch support for modern useful software like...browsers and word processors.
...of OSX? I doubt that Apple will feel any need to port the OSX GUI to Linux, but a few hackers and a few gallons of caffeine might be enough to bring over the new GUI from the darkside.
hey dipwad-
not to sound pro "wintel" (oh, the VAST conspiracy that is capitalism), but ummm...
microsoft and apple both stole their ideas for the gui with a mouse from XEROX. one implemented it faster than the other, and one with more commercial success than the other.
rip on ms all you want, i do it too. but at least i get my facts straight.
and btw: it seems to be universally accepted in the financial world that it was steve's "genius" that brought apple back to its knees and near death. sure, he started out with a wonderful concept and did well, but hey... megalomania can only drive a company so far, then you have your standard revolt and coup.
hey, when i took acid, -i- was a visionary too.
--endcycle--
I have no idea what the *native* Mac OS X APIs are like but the Carbon APIs are not derivatives of NextStep, they are just cleaned-up Mac APIs without all the legacy cruft.
The big pimp Microsoft keeps the old Mac ho alive with a weak, but steady stream of addictive crack applications. Without the pimp's apps, the old ho will die. The new Be ho (like the Netscape ho. remember her?) tried to bitch slap the pimp. BIG MISTAKE! Da pimp withheld his crack apps.
This is real.
cpeterso
Acutally, they are not opening up the plug-in. It's the file format that they are opening up. This would allow Adobe to create an application that could write .swf files, but not a player.
What Apple really needs is a good pesticide!
/ \
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign for peace
x
/ \
Command line? Extremely sweet GUI? I have been connecting to my Linux box and doing the command line thing... Repetitive tasks need command line interfaces or some intelligent scripting interface. Tasks that you will only do once or twice... I think a GUI can be fine for such a thing. More recently though I have been mounting my root directory via netatalk and writing the shell scripts with BBEDIT and running them in the ssh terminal. Once OS X gets here I can do it all in one stop shopping... To me it is all about one thing... workflow. With OS X all of the tools are on one box. What else are you going to edit a picture on? You're pesky "Can't devide?/Intel inside?".
I had a flame... but she had a fire.
I've been trying to gauge the reaction of fellow mac users to the idea of creating a mac-like fork of GNOME, with all of the mac keyboard shortcuts, menu selections, dialog buttons where they should be, global menubar, etc. A lot of mac users are going to find to GNOME no better than the wintel UI ('cause it basically *is* the Wintel UI), and I think the computing public should not be exposed to another ten years of M$ GUI design mistakes, even if the people repeating them (GNOME) does really have the best of intentions.
If I developed this beast, would you (or anyone else reading this post) be inclined to choose it over the existing GNOME?
Knowing Apple, they'll come up with some way to gloss segvs over; you also have to take into account that, by all accounts, Quartz is loads more stable than X. :)
BTW, that debug screen is the MicroBug in-ROM debugger; there's an Apple technote related to it that I can't remember the link to right now. It's intended mostly for doing debugging with two machines, one with MacsBug (a much higher-level debugger), and one with your app running, stopped by MicroBug. Some commands in it are:
g (address)- exits debugger, continues execution at current address, or at the specified address
dm address - dump memory contents at address
sm address value - set the contents of memory at address to value
Don't remember the rest off the top of my head - the most I ever have used it for is impressing and/or scaring tech-illiterate people at my former Mac-heavy school.
"If ignorance is bliss, may I never be happy.
-- Veni, vidi, dormivi
Do you trust MS enough to let them know your entire purchasing history?
No, but I don't have much evidence that M$ is stealing my purchasing history.
I haven't seen any security advisories about M$ stealing user data, and IMO, they don't have to.
They are a monopoly, so they don't need to make bits of cash on the side selling demographics.
To be completely honest with you, I trust M$ more than AOL.
Keep in mind the source for Netscape is NOT open, only the source for Mozilla, which is a different product.
I'm a lot more concerned with things like RealPlayer, which have proven security/privacy holes.
You can see there isn't a "report https accesses" module.
Ever heard of a packet sniffer? Or a personal firewall?
Network traffic analysis may not be built in, but it is readily available.
There's no denying M$ is evil, but AOL is just as, if not more so, and Mozilla is still a ways from being done.
--K
Gotta go, I think some black helicopters just flew over.
Why do people hate Internet Explorer have you used it lately?! It's awesome, it's quick to load, less of a resource hog than some other browsers and dosent choke on pages with complex tables ie that giant jerky re-render when you scroll down. It's just plain better than anything out currently so stop your Mozilla Netscape Nazi-ing and just giving that microsoft won the battle of the browsers.
Apple has always tried to embody quality and their choice to use IE is a good one would you rather see netscape 6? Dont even get me started on Netscape 6, AOL owns netscape? They STILL use IE in AOL not that I use or endorse either but it just goes to show you that netscape hasnt been good since 3.x and the continued development of netscape is like some houseguest that wont go home, it was nice when it showed up but now it's just anoying.
My guess is that you are an idiot, and I'll leave it at that.
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
This is so beautiful. It makes me want to throw my PC outside my window and rush out to buy a Mac. bart
Why even use that when you can use icab? Its well on its way to supporting more features for web browsing. The name is fucking retarted, but its better then omni web.
Fight censors!
"Not my manner of thinking but the manner of thinking of others has been the source of my unhappiness." - M
Of course Apple isn't open source. Have they ever claimed to be? No. They have simply stated that the Darwin core of OS X is open source. Why would they spend years developing OS X and give its source away? Apple is not an open source organization, they are a company that makes a profit. Before you criticize Apple, educate yourself. There are plenty of things to criticize Apple about, but sorry pal, this isn't one of them.
In this case, you were foolish. For, at http://www.opensource.apple.com/projects/darwin/fa q.html, it says
"Darwin and BSD
Q. Why is Darwin based on BSD UNIX?
A. There are several reasons for this. The first one is historical. Mac OS X draws a lot of its code base from a system called OPENSTEP, created by NeXT Software, which Apple bought in 1997. OPENSTEP and its predecessor, NEXTSTEP, were based on 4.3 BSD. "
Which clearly disprooves the point you were trying to make.
I'll give it to you that AOL prying into my stuff is worse than Microsoft doing it... well, maybe. Just a little.
:-) Just because you have lots of money already and are a monopoly doesn't stop you from getting even more greedy. Where I live you have to pay to get unlisted, then you pay an additional fee on top of that to stop your unlisted info from being sold to telemarketers. And then you have to pay even more to get your name hidden on Call Display. They won't even block your phone number unless you dial *67 (or is that *69?) all the time or are part of some kind of Witness Protection Program. Really, I kid you not.
:)
And RealPlayer has a lot of security problems too, I'll agree.
But wait: Netscape, IE, RealPlayer, these are all closed source apps. The common theme. Don't trust anything that keeps you from looking inside.
>Ever heard of a packet sniffer? Or a personal firewall?
The difference here is that you choose to put (and setup) these on your machines. If you decide you want to log certain transfers, so be it. At least you got the choice.
If your ISP is doing it, well, that's no good. I'd get the heck away from them and get on a real ISP that respects your privacy.
>They are a monopoly, so they don't need to make bits of cash on the side selling demographics.
Three words: Bell Phone Book.
>I haven't seen any security advisories about M$ stealing user data, and IMO, they don't have to.
I still remember the "old days" [not so old, really]. Before MS quit wasting their time going after friends sharing software. The days where Microsoft threatened (and, I believe, implemented in early betas) to include a phone home feature in Chicago that would report a scan of the users hard drive. I don't think I kept the magazines that discussed it (stuff from '94 is just a little out of date).
And lets not forget the NSA key.
While Microsoft is better than AOL, it's sort of like comparing being stamped on by an elephant and mauled by a bear. They both suck.
I'm actually using Mozilla 0.7 right now. It's great. It feels like Netscape 4 (which was easy to use, when it worked), and is really fast. Plus it renders HTML quite well.
Just a sidenote: Any particular reason why your website just forwards you to slashdot? Just wondering...
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
NextSTEP 1.0 was released June 1989. BSD 4.4-Lite2 was released June 1995. You do the math.
Shortly thereafter, with millions of dollars of Xerox investment cash and a bunch of former Xerox engineers, the Macintosh project was launched at Apple. A lot of the STAR concepts were reworked at Apple, and a lot more put in -- overlapping rectangular windows, pull-down and pop-up menus, a (semi) direct representation of the filesystem, et cetera. The modern mouse design (well, the modern mouse with a ball in the bottom) came directly from Apple. It was much more robust than the Xerox design, and it cost nearly 1/8th as much to produce. {Insert one-button joke here}
It hardly seems like a theft to me. STAR was a dumped project, and Xerox gave a whole lot of money to Apple at the beginning of the Macintosh project. Sounds more like an investment to me. If I found out someone had ripped me off, I certainly wouldn't give them money afterwards.
Microsoft's adoption of the mouse and GUI occurred later, and aped an existing, "live" product. I see that as a big difference. It wasn't exactly a ripoff of Apple or Xerox -- they were taking a risk -- but not as big a risk as Apple did.
Does anyone know if they fixed the "holes" in the icons on the dock? For instance, can you click in the center of Internet Explorer's e? In the public beta, clicking on transparent parts of icons was as good as not clicking the icon at all.
How about that the Finder is a Carbon application that is removable. Could be replaced by a Cocoa version, or a version someone else writes (kalidescope). Couple that with Darwin and you could have a PC running the exact same look and feel OS without Apples help.
Ok, maybe thats not the core, but the chewy goodness on the outside. Other thing of note is that the Mac OS X team is mostly comprised of NeXTStep engineers... who had NeXT running on PA-Risc, Motorola, and Intel. X will ship March 24th, guarenteed. $129 includes 3 CD's. Mac OS 9.1, Mac OS X, and Mac OS X Developer tools.
People think Microsoft is the answer. Microsoft is just the question, "No" is the answer.
"Where are my files? Where are my aliases? Where is my underwear?" It still amazes me that people think you have to be some kind of computer genius to understand "system files go here, applications go there, documents go here or with the application" and refuse to learn those things after a decade of working with computers. I mean, do they go calling the office manager looking for the stapler because there isn't a note taped on top of the desk telling which drawer it's in? But they have no problem calling tech support and spending half the day screaming that they can't work because some desktop alias to their favorite application got trashed. I guess some of it is age of first exposure to computers, but it's much more fun to pretend that it's all stupidity.
I support about 30-40 users and I've found a good cure for people putting their stuff on the desktop. When I give new users their computer orientation (how to access the file server, which printers to use, etc.) they are all told that they have a "Documents" folder/directory and they must put all their documents in that folder or sub folders or it will not be backed up. Several users choose to ignore this, and I remind them every time they have a problem with their computer and I go to thier office to fix it and see the desktop just packed with documents. I live for the day when something bad happens and they ask me to restore the files. I'll simply tell that that I would be able to do just that, if they had followed the directions I gave them several times. Then I'll just do my best BOFH laugh and leave the room.
Hmmm... no, it looks strikingly like the dock from NeXT. The docks in Afterstep and WindowMaker look a lot like the dock from NeXT as well. Gnome most likely picked up its "dock" (panels) from those two and crossed it with Windows 95's task bar. Having used all of the above, I have to say I'm most impressed with Apple's dock. Actually, I'm more impressed with the Quartz UI layer that makes it possible.
Development on OS X is a dream. Actually, development with GNUStep on Linux/FreeBSD is a dream too, if only a Glade-like tool would come out to do the reduce the boring work of UI development and let people get coding the useful stuff; OS X has Interface Builder which is both to-the-point and fast.
It's better to hold off using UFS for now. Just wait until support is better. For now stick with HFS+.
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
How do you know? I hope they synced up with the current 4.x FreeBSD instead of the version Mach-FreeBSD 3.3 the PB uses. That would constitute quite an update, imho.
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
... or does the dock look strikingly like the one from GNOME?
~centurion
No, because Mach takes care of that...
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
nuff said
Wait a minute. I am.
poor widdle me.
When Quartz and/or Aqua crashes (*if* they crash, it only happened once to me), you end up in the console. When the kernel panics (only happened once with me), you end up in the kernel debugger. I don't know if that will change in the final version though.
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
I have to both agree and disagree with you. Apple's implementation of UFS is not faster than their implementation of HFS+. Everything I have seen has put them at about par in normal usage. But HFS+ does not have "less features", everything that UFS does, HFS+ can do to. This includes permissions, modification date/time, etc. In fact HFS+ provides for features that UFS does not, aliases (a more complex version of hard links), forked files (now deing denigrated by Apple), etc... With the one exception that HFS+ is case insensitive but case preserving (it will remember whether you called the file THISFILE or tHiSfIlE, but will view both names as the same file). This is/was a consious decision by Apple for Human Interface reasons.
At this point there are only two reasons for selecting UFS over HFS+. One is that you need a case-sensitive filesystem for legacy codebase reasons. And the other is that you can take a HFS+ hard drive to a MacOS 8.1-9.x system and bypass all security (the older MacOS's do not understand/enforce file permissions). This is really not all that much of a security precaution because you could just take a UFS disk to a linux box and play with user Id's to bypass security anyways... but this arguably take a bit more knowledge. IN any case, if someone has physical access they can always bypass any security.
Um.. everything compiled already, a company ready to sell you support (and stand behind their product... the iServices team rocks!), and the wonderful graphical remote admin tool... sounds like a lot of tech support cost savings.. oh, and did I mention an unlimited copy of WebObjects thrown in to the bargin, and NetBooting, Macintosh Manager, AppleShare over IP (+ SMB and NFS all admined together), and all of this with Apple's ease of use... hmmm.. sounds like a great deal to me...
Ars Technica has a pretty good article on Quartz
As to running MacOS X on an iMac, I am writing this on a 333Mhz iMac running MacOS X PB and am getting decent performance. This computer only has 96Mb of RAM and I am not running into memory thrashing. Occasionally during a developing session switching apps takes a moment wile it swaps out pages, but I don't use Classic so I don't really run into big problems. And everyone is saying that the newer builds are better both in terms of speed and memory footprint. I wouldn't put up an old iMac as the ultimate gamer's machine, but then again if that is your real purpose in computing get a PC, or better yet a console box...
On the impressions side, I have set up a couple of computers for multiple people, and fins it very easy to setup the computer for both power users and newbies. There is still a lot of work to go (from the Public Beta.. the newest showing at MWSF solved a lot of things), but this is something to look forward to.
Don't trust anything that keeps you from looking inside.
;) from security analysts lately,
:-) Just because you have lots of money already and are a monopoly doesn't stop you from getting even more greedy.
:)
Definately. But IE has been getting a lot of 'attention'
and I have yet to see any evidence of covert data collection. I consider it relatively safe and the benefits outweigh the drawbacks at this time.
>Ever heard of a packet sniffer? Or a personal firewall?
The difference here is that you choose to put (and setup) these on your machines. If you decide you want to log certain transfers, so be it. At least you got the choice.
If your ISP is doing it, well, that's no good. I'd get the heck away from them and get on a real ISP that respects your privacy.
Agreed.
I am in NO way saying covert logging is acceptable.
I was stating that you don't NEED something to be open to see if it's sending out covert packets, you can use any common network tools to check.
Hell, I think I'd rather check open products with the packet sniffer than reading the code....
Certainly takes less time than wading through 10k lines of network code looking for evil write()s.
(And if you ever HAVE looked at Mozilla code, you'll know what I mean...)
Having the source does make it easier to PROVE there is a problem tho.
Three words: Bell Phone Book.
True, although I see service providers tend to be more insidious than companies that ship actual products (even if those products are intangible).
This is part of the reason I find AOL to be scarier than M$.
I still remember the "old days" [not so old, really]. Before MS quit wasting their time going after friends sharing software. The days where Microsoft threatened (and, I believe, implemented in early betas) to include a phone home feature in Chicago that would report a scan of the users hard drive. I don't think I kept the magazines that discussed it (stuff from '94 is just a little out of date).
Oh, they haven't stopped with this yet. They're trying to get a similar anti-'piracy' 'feature' into Whistler.
BUT, this thread isn't about Windoze OS, it's about IE, and more specifically, Mac IE.
M$ is evil and controlling - we already know this.
And lets not forget the NSA key.
The NSA Key is probably not:
Here's what Schneier has to say about it.
While Microsoft is better than AOL, it's sort of like comparing being stamped on by an elephant and mauled by a bear. They both suck.
Very true, but just because a company puts out turds 98% of the time doesn't mean they CAN'T put out an acceptable, even useful, product.
I'm actually using Mozilla 0.7 right now. It's great. It feels like Netscape 4 (which was easy to use, when it worked), and is really fast. Plus it renders HTML quite well.
Mozilla isn't bad. It's getting there, but I still like IE better for daily browsing.
Maybe in three months it'll be good enough for daily use.
Konqueror, on the other hand, is prolly the best one for freenixes right now.
Just a sidenote: Any particular reason why your website just forwards you to slashdot? Just wondering...
Just a bit of satirical commentary about blind linux and open source zealotry.
The attitude of 'Linux is the be-all end-all One True OS for Every Purpose' just grates after a while.
My real site will be here.
(No, it's not a redirect to goatse.cx, either.)
--K
Back on topic: There's also lots of stuff hidden in the PB that hints about inclusion in the final release. For example, Terminal.app with transparancy can be turned on with:
$ defaults write com.apple.Terminal TerminalOpaqueness 0.8
And that's an *undocumented* feature. There's more stuff like that, just scour the web for Mac OS X tips and tricks
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
AOL, however, just plain scares me with their marketing tactics. Not only do they nail you with advertising while on their service (my family had an AOL account from 1995-2000 -- I jumped ship but my little sister wanted to stay on), they even nail you after you leave!
I remember canceling the AOL account over the phone (after several insistent "no I do not want to stay on"'s. Then they said "OK, sir. Sorry for your cancellation. Now here's a special message" and they pitched their long distance plan.
What company uses these kind of tactics. It's sorta sick how newbies get roped into this shit.
-
-Be a man. Insult me without using an AC.
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
What's more, these UI changes are discussed in much greater detail at Wincent.org
This is a hands-on review of the build which was demonstrated at MacWorld. Some of the key points are:
Plus lots of other stuff.
The guy who writes FinderPop, another shareware program that does something like this, apparently works at Apple.
--
This space unintentionally left unblank.
It looks like you're mixing version numbers. OS X is a variation of BSD 4.4 Lite on a heavily modified Mach 3 kernel.
--
This space unintentionally left unblank.
That's because it has always been here. http://developer.apple.com/products/darwinsdk.html * *
***********************************************
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
If they had kept on plodding with newton, not only would they be ahead of game with the likes of Palm, but since their Newton OS was that much more beefier that the Palm it could have been the platform of choice for the wireless information device market.
This is a market in which Microsoft and it's primary competitor Symbian are going after, and to many it would appear to be the future of computing.
Had they kept on going the likes of Motorola, Ericsson and Nokia might have well been more interested in Apples product than Psions. Then they would not have to worry about making up silly visions of how they want the market to be, and instead deliver what the market wants.
This is not to say that I think the PC is dead, just that the broad appeal of having easy access to all your necessary information while on the move is a big draw to the general populace. The geeks will still of course prefer their fat pipes, multiple desktops and the raw power that their PCs provide as well as minimal exposure to sunlight. Although most likely they will still not want a Mac. Oh well...bye bye Apple.
You're correct, you don't "need" to have separate partitions. However, if you don't, you won't gain access to the UFS file system. I've been working with the PB for a couple months as well as the developer tools, and in my experience UFS has better performance.
No thanks. I don't smoke anymore.
It's documented on the apple website somewhere.
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
Though after using a NextStep-derived window manager for a while, I will happily say that saving things to the desktop - one of the things they are putting back IN to OS X is for weak minds, sloppy thinking, poor organization, and folks who spend lots of time and money on tools they are too lazy to understand.
"Where are my files? Where are my aliases? Where is my underwear?" It still amazes me that people think you have to be some kind of computer genius to understand "system files go here, applications go there, documents go here or with the application" and refuse to learn those things after a decade of working with computers. I mean, do they go calling the office manager looking for the stapler because there isn't a note taped on top of the desk telling which drawer it's in? But they have no problem calling tech support and spending half the day screaming that they can't work because some desktop alias to their favorite application got trashed. I guess some of it is age of first exposure to computers, but it's much more fun to pretend that it's all stupidity.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
I have to admit the thing that I really like about this is the integration of PDF. As a format it has some problems (at least some of the older PS->PDF conversions seemed to be iffy), but from a digital imaging and digital printing background I know I would have loved this when I was spending days trying to fix people's WYSI(not)WYG problems.
I'll be getting OSX for my fiance's (original) iMac, and my biggest worry is that it will require a lot more memory and processing power than the iMac currently needs. We shall see...
For people that have had a chance to use it, what are the first impressions?
Waltz, nymph, for quick jigs vex Bud.
I'm looking FORWARD to the day when it's not the best browser out there, but so far, it is.
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
Oh come on.
This is Slashdot. In Slashdot-land, M$ cannot make a product that's better than a competitior.
Even if that competitor is AOLScape.
Even if that product renders CSS1/2 better than the competitor.
Even if that product is faster than the competitor.
Even if that product is more stable than the competitor.
It's all about the rational decisions, baby.
--K
(Me? I just think he's 'trolling')
*of course* I mean on top of the mach layer... Consider it a typo or a brainfart.
--
Slashdot didn't accept your submission? hackerheaven.org will!
I've been a Mac user since the very beginning -- our family had a Mac 128k, and it went through a few upgrades before being replaced by a Plus... and on and on. I have the Mac GUI burned into my brain, and honestly it colors the way I relate to all GUIs, including Windows and Gnome.
On the one hand, I am jazzed about all the new features and unix-y goodness of OSX. On the other, I am terrified of the new interface. I have been using the PB, and I didn't like the interface. Maybe I am just picky; maybe it's because I have too much Mac history to abandon. But everything felt buried to me, hidden under layers of needless windows. I live by desktop shortcuts and the Apple Menu when I use my Mac. I arrange my Win & Debian desktops the same way, as much as possible.
The fact that Apple LISTENED to us and put back features like the Apple Menu is very encouraging. The fact that they changed things so radically inthe first place is frightening.
I'm afraid to jump wholeheartedly into OSX, so it's definitely a dual-boot setup for me. The Pismo's drive is already partitioned... I am looking forward to X-Day.
That might be what I heard, but I /thought/ the format was already open...
I know there are a couple GPL'd Flash generators/players out now, but they may have just reversed the format.
--K
Well, just drag it out, realease it, see the 'poof' and it's gone. Oh, and delete /Applications/Internet Explorer to really get rid of it :)
Uninstalling IE just became easier
2 Important points come up from this, for those looking to understand the Mac and MacOS X.
First: Internet Explorer 5 for Mac is an incredible product in every respect. This product symbolizes what Microsoft could have been had they not become such a Monopoly. It's very fast, renders everything perfectly, and (to my knowledge) is one of the most standards compliant browsers out there (yes, this IS a microsoft product!). Internet Explorer 5 Mac is my prefered browser under the Classic MacOS, although I prefer OmniWeb under MacOS X.
And about the uninstalling part, yes, it's true.
With MacOS X, Apple is bring Bundles to the table. Bundles are folders that appear to be single application icons to the user. This folder contains the application executable (perhaps several executables, each optimized for a different CPU or something), all of the resources, help files, images, frameworks, shared libraries, etc. And yet, to the user, it's just a single icon.
Apple is pushing this concept very hard, becase for 95% of apps, it removes the need for an installer. Just Drag&Drop to install the app. Just drag the app to the trash, and it's deleted, along with all of it's support files. Drag the single icon to move it. If you haven't figured it out yet, I really love this feature. =)
You are correct that you may not *need* to partition, but I personally would recommend it, or at least have 2 OS 9 system folders. OS X puts some stuff in your OS 9 system folder which can (in the PB) cause conflicts when running in OS 9.
Not to mention the fact that OSX re-arranges the hierarchy of everything, including where your system folder is, and this confuses the HELL out of some apps when you are in OS9. If you compound it with Multiple Users you'll find that it gets worse.
The best sceme, as others have said, seems to be 2 partitions with OS9 on both, so OSX doesn't mess with your OS9 boot environment.
The joke in Apple's (remarkably arrogant, but clever) old ad was that up until W95, MS-DOS-based operating systems were limited to eight.three filenames, and used a filesystem that depended too heavily (on behalf of the user) on paths. C'mon, you know this.
The Mac OS has never had such abhorrent restrictions (filenames can be 31 chars long including non-printing and symbolic characters, paths are all but invisible to the uninterested user). So, you may as well type, "Congratulations, Apple! Bravo." Case, spaces, and punctuation intact, BTW. Since before Windows even went 32-bit.
< tofuhead >
It is still the dark of night.
Heh, good old marketing. "We made a mistake in removing the apple menu" becomes "Based on feedback from Mac OS X Public Beta users..."
Alas, www.apple.com/darwin seems to be choked (slashdotted?)... not great considering they're running it on OSX server (apache)
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
Fuckwits.
You are then less than fuckwit.
From the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:
aesthetic or esthetic (s-thtk) adj.
1. Relating to the philosophy or theories of aesthetics. 2. Of or concerning the appreciation of beauty or good taste: the aesthetic faculties
[....]
Apple: way smarter than their critics!
That lameness filter truly does suck. It's kinda self-referential in that way.
I tried to suggest that slashcode be modified so that users with enought karma could override the lameness filter (at least for ASCII-art), but was given a polite shove back the way I came.
oh well.
Agreed. Konqueror is /really/ good. I'd even venture to say it beats Moz in everyday usability.
the good 'ole Flash plugin. (Now there's someting that ought to be OpenSource'd..)
Actually, I seem to remember hearing that Macromedia was planning on opening the Flash plugin, but I may be very wrong.
Anyone else heard of such things?
--K
You are correct that you may not *need* to partition, but I personally would recommend it, or at least have 2 OS 9 system folders. OS X puts some stuff in your OS 9 system folder which can (in the PB) cause conflicts when running in OS 9.
My personal recommendation is to install OS X on a separate partition, and then install a basic install of the OS 9 system folder on the same partition to be used for the Classic environment. Then you can remove the redundant extensions (Quicktime, Open Transport, etc) and copy over any needed extensions from your main OS 9 system folder.
This has the advantage of keeping your main OS 9 folder untouched by OS X. It also has the advantage of speeding up the boot time and lessening the overhead of the classic environment of OS X because you have removed many extensions that it will try to load but don't work anyway.
This is a little safer than blindly allowing OS X to do what it pleases to your OS 9 system folder.
Anyway, this is how I have been handling classic in the PB. Also, it has allowed me to keep using the classic environment (OS 9.0.4) while upgrading my main system to OS 9.1.
out.
"Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
With the migration to BSD, there's gonna be a whole lot of segfaults. This raises another question: in Linux, when X segfaults, it bumps back to text mode and displays, "Segmentation Fault. Core Dumped." But what will OSX fall back to? That debug screen that you get when you press that button next to the reset button? I've pressed that button, and the only way I've gotten out of debug mode is to restart the whole damn thing.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
If Microsoft has ported IE & Office to BSD can Linux be that far behind?
Also the great people at OmniWeb ported Q3A to Mac OS X. Here it is. This port is a 20% improvement over the MacOS 9 port. I love it! Enjoy.
Trust the source!
Well, we know of the rumors. Yes, they're rumors- but Bill and Co's not stupid. Careless, sloppy, and arrogant they are- stupid they are not (consider that they've basically hoodwinked the world's populace into buying their barely functional eye-candy apps...).
However, having said this, while MacOS X happens to have Mach/BSD, the programming API's all Apple's doing and abstracts away most of the underlying OS. Succinctly put, in order for this to make fruit for MS on the Linux front, they'd need to license and make a version of the MacOS X layer for Linux or make GNUStep fill in the holes between it and the MacOS X developer API. Not likely to happen unless MS is desperate and hurting BADLY.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
webobjects is pretty nifty, though i have only played with it briefly. a good database, however, is apple's true shortcoming. combined with some opensource-ish project management and content management applications though, the servers would be really powerful. having been bitten a few too many times by their server strategies though (two original osx servers--backup software anyone?), apple will need to convince their customers to adopt an apple implementation as opposed to notes for example. an apple cube server with an internal ait, and good apps...
Does anyone know whether "old" 9.1 compatible versions of Photoshop / PageMaker / CodeWarrier are running in OS X ? I mean, I read that they have been trying running OS9.1 within OSX ... well, you do not ReAlLy need that, but the applications ... !!
I have yet to find a productivity application that doesn't work well: CyberStudio, CodeWarrior (although version 6 is a Carbon app, and runs native in OS X), Word, Excel, even most games run well. The only apps which don't work are those that need direct hardware access.
You actually DO need to run a full OS 9, though, since there are many APIs which are not supported in Carbon/OS X. Those APIs are the main difference between Classic and Carbon apps.
Russell
absolutely. they run in the Classic environment just like any other 'classic' application. They haven't been "trying" to run OS 9.1 inside OS X. It runs, and runs fairly well; it's not technically emulating OS 9, as the classic environment affords OS 9 direct access to the processor and memory.
woof!
What Apple's website says is a convenient fiction because the truth is
quite complicated. OS X is derived from nextstep. Nextstep was based on
plain 4.4BSD-Lite2 (iirc). Now Apple's taken that, and fancied it up
with Aqua, but under the hood all Apple has done (quite a lot, actually)
is insert Mach 3 in place of Mach 2.5 (iirc OS X Server uses 2.5), and
re-engineer FreeBSD back into the core, to replace the dodgy 4.4BSD that
was present in nextstep (not saying it was bad, it was just not quite
there with posix compliancy etc). Now this FBSD is not the entire thing.
It is just a FBSD personality on top of the Mach kernel. The BSD
personality runs in kernel space (for speed reasons -- look at MkLinux
if you don't believe me) but in user mode.
It would seem to me that the availability of a CarbonLib for Un*x other than MacOSX would be primarily a business strategy / marketing decision. According to Apple's MacOSX core technologies page the foundation for all other MacOSX APIs (Frameworks in Apple speak) is the marriage of a modified Mach 3.0 microkernel and a FreeBSD 3.2 derived BSD variant. This is what Darwin is. (NOTE: The Darwin page is not loading as I right this, but perhaps it is available as you read it.) Assuming that Carbon for OSX is restricted to making calls against these API's or the frameworks they support it would seem relatively straightforward to port to any of the other BSD derived Un*x variants. Non-BSD derived Un*x variants would probably be more challenging ports.
I would be interested in comments from anyone who has a more detailed knowledge of OSX and what the technical challenges of porting everything above Darwin to another Un*x would be.
Regardless it is unlikely that Apple would persue this strategy. They (Steve) seem(s) hell bent on only offering the benefits of OSX to purchasers of Apple hardware. This is a business strategy decision and I think an ultimately failed one. It is probably at least somewhat the results of Steve's scars from attempting to make NeXT a software only company. He wasn't successful in that so it seems unlikely he would try to climb that hill again.
Nope. Explain why "sysctl kern.symfile" would print "kern.symfile = \mach.sym" on a non-MACH kernel?
Besides the IP stack has a lot of anoying little problems not in FreeBSD that I remember from the NeXT. Like needing the arp cache cleared once in a while. Oh, and a very mach like "top" (which I would post along with a FreeBSD one, but slashdot rejects it as "lame"). The MACH one is reporting a lot more thread info and four memory stats vs two.
I know Apple says a lot about FreeBSD, but they don't quite say they are FreeBSD. They can use FreeBSD device drivers, but that can be done with a shim layer (which is a good idea -- it would be nice if they had one for Linux and NetBSD drivers as well).
It still ain't bad. It is a lot better then OS9, but it isn't as nice as it would be if it were on a modern kernel (like FreeBSD 4.x, or Linux).
you need not partition to boot between MacOS 9 and OS X, matter of fact if you want the best performance from running Classic under OS X you best put them both on the same partition (word to your mother) and as i say, you can easily boot between straight-up OS 9 and OS X...
There is a new forth coming Mac OS-X server coming that supports JSP and JavaServlets through tomcat (as well as PHP4, MySQL, Apache etc.. etc..).
http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/
Steve said all of this at his keynote address. Which is available online so you can here it from his lips directly.
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf01/
I'm sure its been posted here before, but can someone update me with what unix apps will be able to run on OSX when its done? I think I remember apache and a few other things being available but what about other main stream apps. Is it just a matter of a recompile or is the BSD part too nonstandard to port to.
Most command line apps should recompile either out of the box, or with a little nudging. Apache comes with the OS, and I believe Fred Sanchez is making sure new builds continue to work. MySQL has built some OSX binaries, but most of them appear to be for the older OSX Server 1.x (Mach 2.5-based, no Aqua). Somebody is working on PostgreSQL.
The X11 apps are a different story because you have to get your hands on a X server first. There are several different efforts/approaches to this. The most seamless is a relatively expensive ($300) commercial product from Tenon. It runs X apps alongside native OSX apps. You can exit to raw Darwin and run something like XFree86, but you cannot run any OSX native GUI apps until you launch back into the window server.
Overall, anything that runs on *BSD should be able to make its way to OSX pretty effortlessly. Some of the remaining kinks should be worked out by the time the shrinkwrapped product hits shelves on March 24, and I'm sure things will continue to evolve via Darwin. Work done on Darwin is routinely synced with the OSX tree and vice-versa.
Also note that the revamped version of Mac OS X Server, which will come up several weeks after March 24, will be based on the same core as consumer OSX. It will add server-specific packages and some very cool GUI tools for things like Apache and IP filters. It comes with PHP, Tomcat, and MySQL preinstalled. WebObjects with an unlimited license is also included (previously, a 50 client connection per minute limit), as is a mail server, ftp server, and samba. The last three have UI interfaces for them.
A have a full write-up of this new version of OSXS2 on my site. It's slick.
- Scott
--
Scott Stevenson
WildTofu
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Woo, now I've started slagging off the content of the posts. I knew I was being too nice all this time.
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
The Apple Lisa GUI, on the other hand, was nearly identical to that of STAR. Maybe that's what you're thinking about.
STAR was, I believe, Smalltalk-based, so it did use OOP. I never heard the claim that Jobs invented OOP, though. I own a Mac and like it, and even I'm not ready to swallow that.
the image here is a picture of the IE app for OSx. IE is just another browser on OSX.
------
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
All the same, it's still propaganda for IE...
Consider this, the old NeXT display postscript and NeXT Step code are still proprietary even though neither technology is currently used by Apple.
I'm not sure they could release the source to DPS, even if they wanted to. They had to pay a licensing fee to Adobe for every copy of an OS that shipped with it. NextStep code as a whole, though, is very much in use at Apple. However, some parts of it have been released, such as NetInfo.
Despite the misleading hype, Apple is still closed source. [...] If one has any illusions that Apple is an Open Source company, one need only to speak to the developers of GNU Step who will greet your query with a hearty laugh. Apple open source? No, don't kid yourself.
Who is this attitude going to help?
This is not a black and white issue. It's multilayered and I think it's likely you need more information before you can make a judgement as to the worth of Apple's efforts.
Apple took a big first step with release a fully-functional Unix-based OS in Darwin. True, many of the components (Mach, BSD, etc.) were already available to the public through various other sources and licenses; but this is the foundation for both Apple's consumer and server operating systems. Why is this significant, you ask? It's significant because Apple's engineers are actively developing and improving the core OS on a daily basis. Any time they do this, you benefit. You don't even have to do anything. You just get free code, and Apple writes the check. And furthermore, this code is released under a license that has already had a few revisions, and pretty much everybody seems to be happy with at this point.
Complaining about Apple not releasing the rest of OSX is pointless. Apple, being a publicly-traded, for-profit company, needs to make money. Its positioning as an easy-to-use platform means it cannot possibly justify basing profits entirely on support (not that this business model is flawless in general), and Apple as another x86 box maker just isn't logical. The reason the company could justify the three year development of Mac OS X to its shareholders is that it knew it would gain it back in hardware and software sales. If there was no profit to be made by selling the product, OSX would simply not exist, and the advancement of all operating systems would be affected accordingly. Like it or not, Apple has been and continues to be a is a major influence in evolution of personal computers. As much as slashdotters slam Apple, it's doing pioneering work in Unix usability. This benefits everyone.
Essentially, you're expecting Apple to sit there and spin straw into gold for you. That's not the goal of open source. It's about give and take. Apple is giving you half the kingdom for free, and you just turn around and demand the other half? This attitude only discourages other companies from participating in open source. If you insist on being inflexible and taking an all-or-nothing standpoint on OS source release, then you're going to end up with a whole heap of nothing. You can't just expect Apple to abandon its current revenue streams all at once. That lacks balance and forethought.
The development of every platform cannot be structured identically to Linux. That's just as bad as everything being based on Windows. To avoid inbreeding, you need a variety of concepts, organizations and even business models in order for software to continue to advance. Apple is doing the best thing it can possibly do for the community while still keeping its product line intact.
- Scott
--
Scott Stevenson
WildTofu
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Oh, but XFree86 has been ported to be able to run ALONGSIDE aqua, just look here:http://mrcla.com/XonX/ I've installed it on the PB, and it works perfectly. X11 starts up, and takes over the screen, but a simple command-option-a brings Aqua to the front again.. Best of both worlds, if you ask me :)
NoX
If memory serves, Compaq is also releasing a DVD burner.
My other sig is extremely clever...
That picture shows the NeXT style folder browser with the Internet Explorer application selected. That's why it has the big logo and the name in the title bar.
Personally, I don't think I'd like my folder browser changing names on me, particularly if I had more than one open. At least not completely. Maybe it'll be an option. Even MS Windows Explorer keeps "Exploring - " in the window title.
It's a good thing that aliases on the Mac are dynamic. The OS installer moved things around, but all my handy "shortcuts" and installed applications still work fine.
Uhh, JCR - Sherlock is NOT a web browser. It is a search engine that can index and search both local and remote volumes, and also query multiple search engines online simultaneously. Omniweb is just a (extremely good) browser.
Just to dive in on this post a bit. I think you took the all or nothing approach in your comment. My preferred style is to save or alias everything that I am currently editing to the desktop. That way I don't have to worry about the diggin through the open dialog boxes trying to get to some folder 8 layers deep on a network drive. When stuff goes into a more maintanenace-esque mode, I drop it into a folder and then add that alias to my desktop. And when I go "what the heck is that folder for," I then delete it off my desktop. I am leading two projects and work independently on 4 others. With this system, I am able to keep the icons at 2 and half columns consistently.
All in all, it doesn't make sense to me to not have some stuff on your desktop. Those big, fat icons are the most efficient place to access materials. No Explorer (windows), no open/close triangles (mac), nor a scattering of windows (either). Either method just takes too much time to burrow through.
Sig-"Out beyond fields of wrongdoing and rightdoing, there is a field. I will meet you there." Jelaluddin Rumi
Oh come on... just because it's Explorer it's evil. Have you ever used Explorer 5.0 for the Mac to know just how good it actually is? If you were Apple, getting ready to launch a completely overhauled version of your OS, wouldn't you want to hint to people that, yes Virginia, there is a web browser?
----
----
Am I the only one who thinks Microsoft is a misnomer? Perhaps Macrosoft would be a better fit?
If you scroll down in the screenshot page you will see a shot of the 'new' finder, aka Internet Explorer. Am I mistaking or is micro$oft damaging the great big TEN (X) too ?
Having played with the PB myself, i can attest that it is not as insidious as you may think or imply, although the subliminal is there. What you see is simply the behavior of the "new" finder. What this version of the finder does (which is very much like TkDesk that i onced used on my linux box ~'96/97) Is when you select something with a single click, the far right pane displays a larger icon of that program/picture/folder &tc's icon there. This icon is double clickable as well. If for example instead of IE it was QIII that was selected, the icon would merely be the QIII icon.
How every version of MICROS~1 Windows(TM) comes to exist.
Do the following really mean anything? SCSA MCP CCSA CCNA
--I'm not actually after an answer!
And while you may think that Mac OS X will do it all and be the cat's meow today, what about four or give years from now? It will be outdated and stale, lacking new, useful features. Linux and *BSD can and do keep up with the latest OS developments, but Apple will always lag behind.
Read up on your OSX docs, son. You don't have a clue as to what you're talking about:
Mac OS X System Overview PDF.
- Scott
--
Scott Stevenson
WildTofu
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
There is an excellent NATIVE web browser for Mac OS X, called OmniWeb. You can download it from www.omnigroup.com.
As it happens, this is the browser that Apple cribbed the idea for Sherlock from, and it's also the source of many of the UI ideas that MicroSquish copied from NetScrape who copied it from Omni.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
You're missing the point.
Sure you can have a bunch of consumer devices to access and consolidate information, view movies, read books, make phone calls. But you're always the passive observer in these situations. Jobs is saying Apple will sell the products that will allow you to create DVDs, create web sites, compose and mix music etc. One-trick pony devices aren't appropriate for this sort of stuff.
- Scott
--
Scott Stevenson
WildTofu
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas